Topic: New Rules&Magic PDF

Hi all, I received the preview copy of Rules&Magic and was wondering if the Level Progression chart of the Specialists was supposed to be on the page above (p16)?

Thanks and looking forward to holding the finished book in my hands. :-)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

"Wisdom modifiers affect the character’s non-spell related saving throw
rolls, and for Clerics it affects the time (and thus
expense) required to research spells and create holy
items, as well as influencing the saving throws those
subject to the Cleric’s spells."

It looks like you are missing an "of" between "throws" & "those"

"...influencing the saving throws of those subject to the Cleric's spells."

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

"All characters begin their adventuring careers with
money and equipment with which to start their
adventuring career."

I'm not going to critique every awkward sentence, but this one is terrible and easily fixed.

"All characters start with money and equipment with which to begin their adventuring careers."


"New characters, since their equipment is considered to
be gathered during their travels prior to the start of
play, the players can use the less expensive prices
when buying equipment."

"Since their equipment is considered to have been gathered during their travels prior to the start of play, new characters may use the less expensive prices when buying equipment."

Last edited by Glipkerio (2012-11-23 01:58:12)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

http://i.imgur.com/9922U.png

I use Foxit Reader to view PDFs. Is anyone else seeing this layout issue for the Specialist entry?

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

I think it probably makes sense as a 2-page spread in a book, that's why the XP table is on the page before the rest of the content. Well, maybe.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

The Specialist is getting 2 page spreads as in the previous printing.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

This looks great! I'm really looking forward to all the LotFP stuff coming out, but this hardcover is going to get the most use.

The new phrase "For example" in the sentence about coins in the encumbrance rules makes it sound like 100 coins is an oversized item. Is that intentional? I had read 100 coins as a regular item in the softcover rules.

Also, the accountant is  mis-formatted in the retainers chart.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Summon

"Roll the indicated die type ... This is the Base Number. Roll that die again. If the new roll is less than the Base Number, then roll an appendage on the following table. Roll again and keep adding appendages until a new roll greater than, or equal to, the previous roll is made."


By previous roll you mean the Base Number? If that's the case please use that term. This is specifically one of the areas where I found the Summon description to be confusing in the original version. The text uses non specific or vague terminology and overall the new text of the spell is better this could be clearer.

"Roll the indicated die type ... This is the Base Number. Roll that die again. If the new roll is less than the Base Number, then roll an appendage on the following table. Continue rolling and adding appendages until a new roll greater than, or equal to, the Base Number is made."

I'm glad to see a rule for when the Domination Rolls tie, but I don't care for what you've chosen. The clear intent of the new rule is to increase the odds of a domination win for the summoned entity on ties. A tie is really a loss now, most of the time. In cases where the casters level and entity's HD + # of powers are equal: 2/5's of the d20 rolls are an uncontested entity win and nearly 3/5's of the d20 rolls offer a chance of entity success.

Summon is the most dangerous spell in LOTFP, the only way to near-ensure success is to make massive financial and/or sanguine preparations prior to casting. Perhaps this tie rule merely emphasizes that but I'd rather not see all the player's preparatory effort thrown away by a single unlucky roll. 

On a tie, I'd rather see each side continue to make domination rolls, retaining all bonuses, until a victor is determined. The caster and entity could be barred from taking other actions until the contest was decided, one domination roll per round. If the caster takes any actions to break his concentration or either take damage then the entity is free to rampage for dx rounds. This seems fair to me and narratively interesting.

Last edited by Glipkerio (2012-12-28 20:31:39)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Summon

The entry for "10. World Under Water" appears out of order. It appears after the two paragraphs that discuss the Referee's freedom to add Forms/Appendages/Etc and Summoning specific entities via Spell Research or Discovery. Those two paragraphs could use their own heading to clearly separate them from the Abstract forms section.

Last edited by Glipkerio (2012-12-28 20:49:43)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Summon

The new version does not give the exact formula by which you determine the maximum level of entity the caster can summon. The new version indicates that the information will be found further in the entry but it is not there. Thaumaturgic Circles and Sacrifices are shown to be components of the formula for determining Domination Rolls only, not max entity HD.

Indiegogo Edition:

Step One
The caster must decide how powerful a creature—
expressed in terms of Hit Dice—he will attempt to
summon. This cannot be more than two times the
caster's level, but the caster's effective level for this
purpose can be modified by Thaumaturgic Circles
and Sacrifices—see below.

Grindhouse Edition:

Creatures with more Hit Dice than two times the caster level (plus Thaumaturgic Circle and Sacrifice modifiers -see below) will not answer the summons.

Combination

Step One
The caster must decide how powerful a creature - expressed in terms of Hit Dice - he will attempt to summon. Creatures with more Hit Dice than two times the caster level (plus Thaumaturgic Circle and Sacrifice modifiers - see below) will not answer the summons.

The above could be read a couple ways. It might be best just to list the specific formula as a formula.

Is it HD = 2 (Caster Level) + (Circle Mod + Sacrifice Mod)
or HD = 2(Caster Level + Circle Mod + Sacrifice Mod)?

Last edited by Glipkerio (2012-12-28 21:38:24)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Summon

"The materials used to draw and decorate the circles are crucial to communicating their infor-mation to the summoned creatures. 500 sp worth of materials is required to invest in a circle for every +1 bonus to the caster's Domination roll, and this is consumed with every casting."

That the Thaumaturgic Circle materials are consumed with each cast is new. One of my characters had constructed a leather roll with an inscribed loop of silver chain that he'd carry around to aid him in casting Summon. The intent was to continually add to it and make it more elaborate and expensive. too bad that that is no longer Rules permissible.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Glipkerio wrote:

That the Thaumaturgic Circle materials are consumed with each cast is new.

The wording is new but that's what was always the intention even if it was previously unclear. For low-level characters the idea isn't bad, but for high level characters that would have access to silver in the hundreds of thousands, it would be a permanent "I Win" situation as the caster would be able to just Summon permanently bound beasties of decent power every day with negligible risk and no expenditure of resources.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Also in Summon, the "imaginary equation" has "f=/= f" which I think should be "f ≠ f" and "(x + 1)2=x" with a regular two that should be squared. Not to pick on Summon or anything...

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

I get the feeling everyone turned to Summon first to see if the instructions were clear this time. big_smile

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Glipkerio wrote:

I'm glad to see a rule for when the Domination Rolls tie, but I don't care for what you've chosen. The clear intent of the new rule is to increase the odds of a domination win for the summoned entity on ties. A tie is really a loss now, most of the time. In cases where the casters level and entity's HD + # of powers are equal: 2/5's of the d20 rolls are an uncontested entity win and nearly 3/5's of the d20 rolls offer a chance of entity success.

Summon is the most dangerous spell in LOTFP, the only way to near-ensure success is to make massive financial and/or sanguine preparations prior to casting. Perhaps this tie rule merely emphasizes that but I'd rather not see all the player's preparatory effort thrown away by a single unlucky roll. 

On a tie, I'd rather see each side continue to make domination rolls, retaining all bonuses, until a victor is determined. The caster and entity could be barred from taking other actions until the contest was decided, one domination roll per round. If the caster takes any actions to break his concentration or either take damage then the entity is free to rampage for dx rounds. This seems fair to me and narratively interesting.

I also dislike the d12 vs d20 rule for domination ties, but that's something I can easily just house-rule back to what i was using before: On a domination tie, the caster and the entity are locked in a battle of wills. Participating in the battle of wills is a full-round action. The caster and the entity (if both take the full-round action to participate) each roll a d20, no modifiers. If it ties again, the battle of wills continues for another round. All rules for who wins are followed based on the flat d20 rolls (great margins and double greats still possible in either direction). Choosing not to participate (or being forced not to participate, circumstantial) means forfeiting the battle of wills, and letting the opponent make the d20 unopposed to determine degree of success.

Back to errors etc, but still in Summon ( tongue ), on the Form table, 19 seems to be represented twice, unless the idea you're going for is that sub-options 9 & 10 only being valid if the d20 Form roll is 19, while 1 through 8 remain valid for d20 Form rolls of 13-19.

Last edited by Yuritau (2012-12-29 02:11:35)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Where can I check the new spell text? I still only have the rules section of the new artless layout.

Here are some things I found from the rules text by the way:

I think on page 34 you may want to make "The following treasures do count for XP
purposes:" a non-bullet item.

Scholars still reduce lab time 1d4 weeks while alchemists only 1d6 days, even though they're more expensive.

In wrestling, does your strength score apply twice or should you add your base attack bonus instead of the mêlée attack bonus, which already has the str bonus?

Dogs still cost 1 gp in cities.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Page 57 - Cast A Spell:

"Magic-Users must both hands free"

Missing a "have"?

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Glipkerio wrote:

One of my characters had constructed a leather roll with an inscribed loop of silver chain that he'd carry around to aid him in casting Summon. The intent was to continually add to it and make it more elaborate and expensive. too bad that that is no longer Rules permissible.

In this instance if you want to follow the new official rules (and nothing says you must), I'd grandfather in the current silver chain and tell him he now has a unique magic item. Protect it!

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

The Specialist's Saving Throws chart is a spacebar click (or so) more to the right than the Saving Throw charts of the other classes

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

"They do have a natural connection with the Earth itself and a cultural understanding of construction and due to this has a greater initial Architecture score than other
characters"

Has should be Have

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

You've pluralized Dwarf to Dwarfs (not Dwarves) but Elf to Elves (not Elfs). This is not a criticism, I just find it curious.

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

"The Specialist must be unencumbered to use any of the class abilities that involve movement, and must have Specialist Tools (see Equipment section) to use Search for finding traps or to use Tinker for opening locks or other such activities"

"All characters have a base 1 in 6 chance to use the Climb skill, which allows a character to climb walls and other sheer surfaces without obvious hand-holds. Characters (except Specialists) must be unencumbered to make this attempt."

These two sections seem to contradict each other. Am I just reading it wrong?

Last edited by Glipkerio (2012-12-31 22:09:10)

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Glipkerio wrote:

You've pluralized Dwarf to Dwarfs (not Dwarves) but Elf to Elves (not Elfs). This is not a criticism, I just find it curious.

I'd guess it's because dwarfs is more correct based on the origin of the word. Apparently Tolkien chose to use dwarves because it sounded better with elves.

http://valarguild.org/varda/Tolkien/enc … uralof.htm

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

"If there is less than a full crew, but more than three-quarters of the full crew, a ship’s speed is
reduced by 25% or the ship takes 1d6 SHP in damage that day.

If there is less than three-quarters crew, but more than one-half of the full crew, a ship’s speed
is reduced by 25% and the ship takes 1d6 SHP in damage that day.

If there is less than one-half crew, but more than one-quarter of the full crew, a ship’s speed is reduced by 50% and the ship takes 1d6 SHP in damage that day.

If there is less than one-quarter of the full crew, then the ship cannot be controlled. It drifts as
decided by the Referee and the ship takes 1d6 SHP in damage that day."

The effect of the first two crew levels are the same. Is this an error? Should having less than 3/4's of the crew but more than 1/2 of it have a different effect on the ship? If not why not combine the two, so it's simpler?

"If there is less than a full crew, but more than one-half of the crew, a ship's speed is reduced by 25% and the ship takes 1d6 SHP in damage that day."

Re: New Rules&Magic PDF

Glipkerio wrote:

Summon

"Roll the indicated die type ... This is the Base Number. Roll that die again. If the new roll is less than the Base Number, then roll an appendage on the following table. Roll again and keep adding appendages until a new roll greater than, or equal to, the previous roll is made."

By previous roll you mean the Base Number? If that's the case please use that term. This is specifically one of the areas where I found the Summon description to be confusing in the original version. The text uses non specific or vague terminology and overall the new text of the spell is better this could be clearer.

The text is correct. The first roll is compared to the Base Number, subsequent rolls are compared to the previous roll, not the Base Number.